Mujitsu and Tairaku's Shakuhachi BBQ

1. Do a search on the Forum search function for 'shakusteel'.

2. Application of zinc (galvanized steel) to the mucous membranes (lips) is contra-indicated.

eB

Vevolis wrote:

Has anyone ever tried making a Shakuhachi out of galvanized steel?

I made some steel shakuhachi years ago and have a few thoughts.

I think it's possible to make decent flutes with steel. It's a clean sound.
The material is solid and sturdy.

One problem is the wall thickness. Thin wall steel reduces the amount of
undercutting possible on the holes. Undercutting can really breathe
life into a flute. For this reason I prefer PVC as a modern, mass produced,
do it yourself alternative to bamboo. Thicker steel can be used but then
there is a weight issue. What about lightweight aluminum?

I made my 1st Shakuhachi  last week using aluminum for the body with a PVC mouth piece that I glued on.  I used a blueprint I found  for a 2.0.  I'm no way a flute maker but was suprised how well it sounded.  Aluminum is easier and lighter than steel to machine; just a thought. 

Take care,

Rick

So, don't be hitting anything with it...

Alan Adler wrote:

I like to say, "material is immaterial".

Uh-oh. That could be interpreted as apostasy around these parts

Alan Adler wrote:

edosan wrote:

Alan Adler wrote:

I like to say, "material is immaterial".

Uh-oh. That could be interpreted as apostasy around these parts

Well it's definitely heresy.  But perhaps not apostasy, because I never did believe.

Alan

In any event, you could be hanged, drawn, and quartered...

Seth wrote:

Alan Adler wrote:

As you can see in these photos, I've use aluminum tubes (round and square), brass (square), and plastic, phenolic and 3/4" ID clear polycarbonate.  The clear polycarbonate may appeal to people who want a different look than PVC.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/20211654@N08/?saved=1

Many controlled experiments have proven that geometry (not material) determines tone.  I like to say, "material is immaterial". 

Best,

Alan

Alan-

These are really interesting.

Are you happy with the results?

I for one am convinced that the material matters tremendously, but I am also convinced that is is just a matter of time until someone finds an artificial material and production process that will surpass bamboo and the traditional crafting method.

Perhaps its aluminum...

Hi Seth,

My thoughts on material are based on my present knowledge.  It's possible that others will offer additional data and change my mind.  Certainly the pros on this forum have much to offer.  But here's what I know.

The ratio between the stiffness of air and the stiffness of most rigid materials is so huge that to air all rigid materials "look infinitely stiff" and sound pretty much alike.  This view is supported by Fletcher and Rossing "The Physics of Musical Instruments", pages 485-6 and by Arthur Benade, "Fundamentals of Musical Acoustics" pages 499-501.  Here are some quotes from Benade:

"The question of whether or not the playing properties of a wind instrument are influenced by the material from which it is made has been the subject of curiously bitter controversy for at least 150 years."  (pg 499)

"Since 1958 I have made several studies of the possible differences in damping that can be made by using copper, silver, brass, nickel silver, or various kinds of wood as the air-column wall material.  If the walls are thick enough not to vibrate and if they are smooth and nonporous, experiment and theory agree that switching materials will make changes in damping that are generally less than the two-percent change that most musicians are able to detect." (page 500)

Some of Benade's discussion focuses on geometric differences, such as sharpness of corners, which often accompany differences in material.  He favors rounded corners at the tone holes and wrote, "A number of metal and plastic instruments which I have reworked [to round the corners] have prompted musicians to remark in public that they play just like good wooden ones". (page 501)

Elsewhere Benade presents formulas for the "cutoff frequency" with declines slightly as the height of the tone hole "chimney" increases.  Of course taller chimneys are normal in wood flutes, due to the thicker wall.   Though orchestral metal flutes have built-up metal chimneys.  Lower cutoff frequency reduces the strength of the higher harmonics slightly.  However I made two identical 0.75" bore tubes.  One of aluminum with .06" wall and the other of polycarbonate with 0.125" wall.  I play them both with the same Delrin head-piece and cannot detect a difference in tone.  My early phenolic flutes had a 0.25" thick wall and they sound similar to my .06" wall aluminum flutes.

My friend and baroque flute maker Rod Cameron (also a friend of Monty's) has said that smoothness of the bore is effected by type of wood.  He said ebony bores are too smooth for his taste.  But here it's really geometry at work, though the geometry is driven by the material.  Cameron also showed me his reamers, which he made deliberately slightly irregular to duplicate the imperfect geometry of original baroque flutes.  He said that without irregularity they don't sound like a baroque flute.

I have not personally experimented with roughening the bore of my plastic or metal flutes, but I believe others have.

Geometry of course differs between various bamboo instruments.  However Monty likes "precision cast" bores.  So perhaps he has eliminated variations in bamboo geometry.

Best regards,

Alan

geni wrote:

hi Alan,
how do your flutes sound? I will be happy to test them  & post some files online.

Hi Geni,

I posted a link to a sound file in this thread:

http://www.shakuhachiforum.com/viewtopic.php?id=3373

Scroll down a few posts until you come to my posting about a sound file.

Thank you for your offer to test my flutes.  I may take you up on it in the future.  At the moment I'm looking for testers in the SF Bay Area.  Mujitsu is scheduled to visit me this Monday.

Best,

Alan

edosan wrote:

Seth wrote:

until someone finds an artificial material and production process that will surpass bamboo and the traditional crafting method.

Um...what does that mean.

That they would be MORE like shakuhachi? Absurd.

That they would do things that shakuhachi cannot presently do? Then they would not be shakuhachi.

Nelson Zink has already done this, and they are no longer shakuhachi.

Fool's errand.

I don't think it's a fools errand for people to attempt to make good shakuhachi out of synthetic materials. For example the Yuu is probably better than what people would have imagined if they had this discussion back in the 1930's for example. Still not as good as bamboo. But in terms of metal or carbon fiber or whatever as a shakuhachi material, until someone who can really play and make shakuhachi AND who has the scientific knowledge of these materials puts his/her imagination to it there is no possibility of success. Maybe a team could do it together, a great player and a craftsman. But I don't see anybody with these qualities working on it unless they're doing it in secret.

Tairaku wrote:

Still not as good as bamboo.

This is my point. Not that bamboo is some sort of wonder-material, but that it IS shakuhachi, the material, the working of  it, the idiosyncracies of it, the relative uniqueness of each one, both in appearance, and how it behaves. What is to be achieved by simply standardizing such a thing? It doesn't even make sense to standardize such a thing; then it's not even the THING any longer. It's not shakuhachi; it's something else, which may be just fine, but it's not shakuhachi, it's something else.

May as well make recorders.

edosan wrote:

Tairaku wrote:

Still not as good as bamboo.

This is my point. Not that bamboo is some sort of wonder-material, but that it IS shakuhachi, the material, the working of  it, the idiosyncracies of it, the relative uniqueness of each one, both in appearance, and how it behaves. What is to be achieved by simply standardizing such a thing? It doesn't even make sense to standardize such a thing; then it's not even the THING any longer. It's not shakuhachi; it's something else, which may be just fine, but it's not shakuhachi, it's something else.

May as well make recorders.

But if you can play shakuhachi music on it using shakuhachi technique isn't it a shakuhachi? No one seems to complain about calling wooden instruments shakuhachi. It doesn't seem that the uniqueness is a determining factor in whether it's a shakuhachi or not. I can see if "improvements" were made like altering the mouthpiece to make them easier to play then you might be on shaky ground, but just developing a manufacturing method with an alternate material I don't think detracts from being able to call the instrument a shakuhachi.

edosan wrote:

Tairaku wrote:

Still not as good as bamboo.

This is my point. Not that bamboo is some sort of wonder-material, but that it IS shakuhachi, the material, the working of  it, the idiosyncracies of it, the relative uniqueness of each one, both in appearance, and how it behaves. What is to be achieved by simply standardizing such a thing? It doesn't even make sense to standardize such a thing; then it's not even the THING any longer. It's not shakuhachi; it's something else, which may be just fine, but it's not shakuhachi, it's something else.

May as well make recorders.

Edosan-

We've been in this movie before.

Today there is a fundamental mystery in the world of shakuhachi making: why can no one mass produce instruments that sound as good as the best bamboo shakuhachi? 

All the scientists say that the material of the shakuhachi is irelevant.  So, why can't someone make one out of plastic that sounds as good as the greatest bamboo but that costs as much as the Yuu?  (And to the Yuu advocates reading this:  yes, I can hear the difference.  And it's a pretty serious difference to my ears.)

Some people believe that the scientists are simply wrong, and that bamboo brings unique properties to the table that will never be replicated by a synthetic material.

I however am sure this is just a technical challenge waiting to be cracked.  One day someone wil find the right material and the right production process and they will be able to produce copies of any shakuhachi no matter what the quality at a fraction of today's prices.

And the reason this challenge has not been overcome is simply because there is not a big enough market out there to justify the financial investment needed.   If there were about 10 million people waiting to buy $100 plastic tru-sounding replicas of my sensei's shigemi, trust me, it would happen.